The argument research-practice gap is based on comparing scholarly literature and experts' views and does not include the analysis of policy documents, policy briefs, and reports. Moreover, there is a high chance of overlap between scholars and practitioners because about two-thirds of practitioners are employed at universities and research institutes. The authors of some publications might relate to water security issues in Central Asia, and hence, practical/technical knowledge might be underrepresented. Future studies can analyze the sources of the research funding of the water resources in Central Asia and how it influences transboundary cooperation.
with ‘fiscal drought’; for national policymakers, it is a credit for international acceptance and visibility, for national experts – the opportunity for publications, global conferences, workshops, and career reputation (Molle, 2009; Mukhtarov & Gerlak, 2013).
Implementation of the river basin approach usually attempts to solve specific water problems. The most well-known river basin organization models (the US Tennessee Valley Authority, Agencies de l’Eau, the Australian Murray-Darling Basin Commission) were introduced to address specific water challenges. For example, the US Tennessee Valley Authority was established to control the river system through a set of dams and reservoirs, accompanied by substantial state-led investments in technology and infrastructure; while the French Water Agencies (Agencies de l’Eau) aimed to solve water quality problems by introducing the ‘polluter pays principle to internalize negative externalities and costs that influenced the development of the European Water Framework Directive (Molle, 2009). In the case of the Australian Murray-Darling Basin Commission, the objective was to enhance water use efficiency by developing water-sharing agreements and creating water markets (Molle, 2008, 2009). These examples reveal that even though these organizations are named under the umbrella of ‘river basin organizations,’ the goals and contexts vary among these models.
The results demonstrated that the role of RBI in Kazakhstan is in the implementation of top-down water policy in the relevant river basin, issuing water permits and limits, monitoring, and protecting water resources. Indeed, different RBOs have different functions and power. RBOs can differ based on their functions: authorities (can formulate and implement changes), entities (are intermediaries with some power), and committees (have advisory and observer roles) (Barrow, 1998). Initially, the idea behind river basin organizations was to be a vehicle of bottom-up planning and decentralized water management. In the case of Kazakhstan, water management remains top-
down, centralized planning and management. Table 7.2 compares the critical elements of the river basin approach in Kazakhstan with the water resources management in the Soviet time and IWRM guidelines. It seems that water resources management and planning are still top-down but just administered on the basin scale and labeled with some elements of IWRM (RBOs, RBCs). Even the river basin planning is implemented according to the Soviet complex schemes of using and protecting water resources, while the key principle of bottom-up planning is overlooked.
Table 7.2 Comparison of river basin management in the USSR and Kazakhstan
USSR IWRM KAZAKHSTAN
River Basin Organization River Basin Inspectorate River Basin Organization River Basin Inspectorate
River Basin Plan Complex schemes River Basin Plan Complex schemes
Basin Councils No Yes Yes
Decision making Top-down, technical solutions
Bottom-up, participatory Mix, mainly top-down Boundaries Administrative-Territorial
(only in Amudarya and Syrdarya rivers)
Hydrological Hydrological/ mixed
RBCs are developing as a platform and dialogue for water users and stakeholders to meet and discuss water security challenges in the basin, but their recommendations are not legally binding. This finding is supported by the data in IWRM Data Portal (2021), where Kazakhstan received the highest score in participation and instrument dimension, especially in public participation and private sector participation, because of the existence of basin councils in all river basins. Nevertheless, interviewers suggested strengthening the role and defining functions of RBCs and RBIs and increasing financing, which is also reflected in the report of IWRM Data Portal (2021).
Fragmented water governance was mentioned by interviews and the relevant literature (Karatayev et al., 2017; Thevs et al., 2017; Zhupankhan et al., 2018). Improvement of national water policy, capacity building of water administrators, and better legislation are also addressed in
the IWRM report. Namely, improvement of the enabling environment was highlighted, including national water policy, laws, basin plans, and transboundary arrangements. Indeed, complex national water legislation is formulated on the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and consists of the Water Code and other regulations, including 28 international treaties, 11 Codes, 37 Laws, 21 Decree of the President, and 115 Government decrees, affecting the issues of water resources management (IWRM Data Portal, 2021). The results demonstrated coexistence and communication of state agencies about data and information sharing but limited cooperation and cross-sectoral coordination in planning and implementation.
River basin management was assessed in this study since practitioners prioritized it in the Delphi surveys. However, scholars and practitioners also proposed improving drinking water supply systems, advancing irrigation management, land restoration, updating monitoring and control systems, training water experts, and promoting transboundary agreements on water allocation in Kazakhstan. The impact of these priorities on water security can be explored in future studies. The credibility of findings is subject to a single case study, inherent subjectivity bias of interviewees, and researcher bias in analysis and interpretation. The findings were cross-checked with recent publications and reports. To minimize subjectivity bias and incomplete information, interviews were conducted with local stakeholders and international consultants with substantial experience in river basin management in Kazakhstan and Central Asia, which gave credibility to their responses.